A conference, which includes some eminent names, is sitting at
Exeter Hall, of persons interested in reforming the present system of licensing. It appears from the discussions on Tuesday and Wednesday that Reformers of nearly all sections are agreed that the present system is bad, that magistrates grant licences care- lessly, and that drunkenness is on the increase. The majority seem to be of opinion that there should be one licensing authority for each district—there are two now, magistrates and Excise commis- sioners—and that a majority of the ratepayers should have a right to veto the grant of any licence. Liverpool, however, goes a step further, and will not under its new Bill grant a licence to any house under a certain rating or without a tax of 351. a year, thus, as Liverpool thinks, limiting the sale to respectable householders. That is not a bad idea, if the conference really desires to secure more order in publichouses, but we fail to see how it is to diminish the sale of liquor. If there is one good shop in a street instead of two, twice the number of people will go to that, the owner, if he be wise, will raise his rent sharply, and the liquor will be as much adulterated as before. We wish some one town would try the experiment of abolishing the sale of liquor to be drunk on the premises altogether, and allowing any shopkeeper to sell it, pro- vided it was taken home. The lower classes would then be placed by law exactly in the position in which the well-to-do place them- selves voluntarily. There would be genuine freedom, yet all enticements to drink would cease.
Previous page
